16.02.2014 23:34, Jennifer stone kirjoitti: [clip] > Yeah, many of the known failures seem to revolve around hyp2f1. An > unexplained inclination towards hypergeometric functions really > tempts me to plunge into this. If it's too risky, I can work on > this after the summers, as I would have gained quite a lot of > experience with the code here.
If you are interested in the hypergeometric numerical evaluation, it's probably a good idea to take a look at this recent master's thesis written on the problem: http://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/porterm/research/pearson_final.pdf This may give some systematic overview on the range of methods available. (Note that for copyright reasons, it's not a good idea to look closely at the source codes linked from that thesis, as they are not available under a compatible license.) It may well be that the best approach for evaluating these functions, if accuracy in the whole parameter range is wanted, in the end turns out to require arbitrary-precision computations. In that case, it would be a very good idea to look at how the problem is approached in mpmath. There are existing multiprecision packages written in C, and using one of them in scipy.special could bring better evaluation performance even if the algorithm is the same. -- Pauli Virtanen _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
